fj ligature not working

[The1CannedMan]

It seems all ligatures now work as intended in a Windows environment (except in OOo; see separate issue), except one: fj. Though not used much in many languages, in Scandinavian languages it is very common, so this clearly needs working out.

EDIT:
I later learned that this was indeed available by enabling historical ligatures (dlig=1)

[CatharsisFonts]

I'm also missing the ſ-ligatures and the long Q from EB Garamond 12.

[The1CannedMan]

I'm also missing the ſ-ligatures and the long Q from EB Garamond 12.

That is just due to your settings. If you are using Microsoft Word, you don’t get the same access to advanced OpenType features as you do with LibreOffice (to the best of my knowledge). Here is a screenshot:

As you can see, both the gothic long s and the long Q are available, if the features are enabled. To enable these, just edit the name of the font, as per the right column in my example. The full list of features available in OpenType fonts, is handily listed by Adobe in their very helpful presentation.

[CatharsisFonts]

My last screenshot was from Font Book, where LIGA and CALT are on by default. The fact that the ſi-ligature doesn't work there means something's wrong with it. I don't have any trouble using those same ligatures with the old «EB Garamond 12 Regular». This is from Word:

Word doesn't seem to offer a SWSH feature, but I can access the swashy /Q/ with SS06. I get some clipping with both fonts — something wrong with the vertical metrics?

BTW, there seem to be some rendering errors in your sample: Overly wide /u/ and /n/ on the first line, exaggerated left sidebearing of /i/ in the third line, etc... is that LibreOffice, or Windows hinting...?

EDIT: Comparing the two fonts in my sample, I'm also noticing a rather irritating blob in the bottom of the bowl of /p/ in the new fonts. Is that a deliberate change?

EDIT: Oh, and I appreciate the cleaning up of /e/. However, /a/ seems to have acquired a kink in the bottom left curve.

[The1CannedMan]

BTW, there seem to be some rendering errors in your sample: Overly wide /u/ and /n/ on the first line, exaggerated left sidebearing of /i/ in the third line, etc... is that LibreOffice, or Windows hinting...?

Well spotted! You are quite right about that. I haven’t done a printout to see how it turns out on page, but it could very well be due to Windows hinting. Honestly, the only reason I am concidering upgrading from 1920×1280 to 4k, is to get better rendering of fonts. I will update this answer when I can get a look at what it looks like printed.

[rodrigoalcarazdelaosa]

Somehow related to this, should there be a ligature between f and u? I'm using the Google Fonts version either with the fontspec package running on XeLaTeX or live in my website (here for example, see line in bold as a function of universal physical constants) and I'm seeing some weird kerning between the f and the u when using bold font:

I hope that's not intended. Is anyone suffering it?
Thanks!